Disappointed: My feature was removed without notifying me

[Kevin Fenzi]

On Wed, 08 Oct 2008 20:09:12 +0200
christoph.wickert at googlemail.com (Christoph Wickert) wrote:

> Am Mittwoch, den 08.10.2008, 12:38 -0400 schrieb Bill Nottingham:
> > Kevin Kofler (kevin.kofler at chello.at) said: 
> > > Bill Nottingham <notting <at> redhat.com> writes:
> > > > There are descriptions which are translated as well....
> > > 
> > > Well, leave it blank, leave it in English (untranslated), put
> > > just a URL for the upstream web page as the description
> > 
> > ... or, actually follow the string freeze, and the string freeze
> > break policy.
> 
> The first constructive statement I hear from a FeSCo member. In fact
> you are the _only_ FeSCo member who responded to my mail at all.

Sorry, I can't speak for the rest of the FESCo members, but I have been
really busy with my regular job and also I have been mostly in
agreement with the posts by Bill. To expect everyone to respond to a
post on a busy list in under 24 hours can be a bit much. 

> >   * Package Reviews  (were not fully done)
> 
> But that's not my fault I guess.

No it's not. I feel partially to blame, as I looked at those reviews
and they looked to be in progress, but it looks like no one is formally
reviewing them after all. ;( 

> >   * Comps: new group with id "lxde-desktop", name "LXDE"...
> > 	o mandatory: lxde-common, lxpanel, openbox, pcmanfm
> > 	o default: gpicview, leafpad, lxappearance, lxtask,
> > lxterminal, obconf, xarchiver ... (wasn't done)
> 
> Wasn't done because
>       * of the missing reviews
>       * I expected someone from FeSCo to give me a go.

A go for what? Adding the comps group? 

...snipp...

> Obviously the only one who was at least a little informed is nirik,
> he's also the only one who apologized for "the lack of communication"
> in a conversation we had yesterday. 

Yes, and I am sad there was a lack of communication, and I hope things
can be done better next time around. 

> But nirik is wrong too: Those LXDE
> packages that are already in Fedora are not there because they have
> been forever but because they were part of my feature (lxtask,
> lxterminal, lxlauncher, ...).

I'm not sure I understand this sentence... ? 
Yes, there are other lxde packages that have passed review and are
in, I understand that. 

> So the decision was made under the assumption that _none_ of the LXDE
> packages has ever passed a review. How can somebody who has read the
> feature page claim that? Why did nobody answer him back?

No, I never claimed that. I claimed that because 2 of them are missing
then the feature must wait. Is that incorrect? 

> Summing it all up: My outrage is because
>       * nobody contacted my to ask me for status or to tell me the
>         feature was dropped. Nobody contacted me at all.

I am very sorry for that. ;( 

>       * the wiki says [1]: "The feature owner is responsible for
>         watching any owned pages for state changes, using the wiki
> watch feature." That's what I did, nevertheless I did not get
>         notified.

That needs to be changed/fixed. The wiki page watch is not sufficent
here I don't think. 

>       * I think I did everything I could to rescue my feature. I
> someone contacted me I would have responded.
>       * the decision was made by people who obviously did not read the
>         feature page and have no interest in the feature. If somebody
>         has not read the page he should not speak up on that topic or
>         decide about it, and if he has further question he should ask.

I don't understand this. I like the feature, I was using it on my phone
for a while. it's a nice DE. I would love to see it in Fedora. 

It was not testable by Beta, so it shouldn't be advertised as a feature
this time. I'm sorry that that is due to communication problems. ;( 
I find it very unfortunate.  

It's after string freeze, but you can get an exception for that: 
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/ReleaseEngineering/StringFreezePolicy

So, you can get things in place, and we can advertise this as a Feature
for F11. 

>       * no FeSCo member except from Bill reacted to my previous mails.

Sorry. 

> Once again: I accept that my feature is delayed, but I can not accept
> the way it was done.
> 
> Regards,
> Christoph

kevin

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 197 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://listman.redhat.com/archives/fedora-devel-list/attachments/20081008/567898f3/attachment.sig>